You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. There are also more forums available to members, such as the Lounge - where members chat about just about anything under the sun except cricket!

I'm guessing at what they might consider for a Sri Lankan tour. If they want 2 spinners who would be the 2nd? Well Yardy and Dalrymple are in the performance squad. I don't know of any other 'spinners' in county cricket who can bat either.

Point taken about their FC averages Rey, but funnily enough they do have better ODI and List A records, presumably because that is where they actually bowl more often?

Well then in truth we don't really have any spinner batsmen who are good enough in the longer format. In which case I personally would simply stick with our status quo bowling line up for that tour or bring in someone like Keedy who is a specialist spinner and drop one of the seamers.

About Rashid's batting, he was selected for the 1st team as a batsman, on the strength of a big hundred for the academy. When nothing was happening for the fast bowlers he was thrown the ball as a change, and the rest is history.

You wouldn't want the guys confidence being battered in Sri Lanka, by the Lankans who are fine players of spin. But what if Monty and Rashid bowl in tandem, i think this would make Monty more defensive and he might as well have to be defensive in order for Rashid to be the wicket taking option.

The two next best spinners after Panesar (in no particular order) are Brown and Keedy, neither of whom can bat.

Neither is international class though and playing two non batting spinners seems a bit steep when not many of the fast bowlers can bat either. I suppose one of them could tour as cover for Monty but not really with the intention of playing both of them. Monty, Rashid and Brown would probably be my 3 but there's a good case for someone really awful like Dalrymyle or Yardy and that would at least save cb a bit of cash for his Sky subs.

Neither is international class though and playing two non batting spinners seems a bit steep when not many of the fast bowlers can bat either. I suppose one of them could tour as cover for Monty but not really with the intention of playing both of them. Monty, Rashid and Brown would probably be my 3 but there's a good case for someone really awful like Dalrymyle or Yardy and that would at least save cb a bit of cash for his Sky subs.

I really can see no point taking three anyway - esp as finding two is so hard.

I really can see no point taking three anyway - esp as finding two is so hard.

It depends on whether the selectors feel that England will have to play 2 spinners on occasion. Of course, not having a plausible second spinner will make it difficult to imagine that will be correct except on the burniest of Bunsens. Still, some extremely burny Bunsens might be anticipated. A lot also depends on the likely overall balance of the side, otherwise known as whether Flintoff is fit. If England is able to play 5 bowlers with Flintoff fit then fitting Rashid in to bowl and bat at 8 without having to drop down to just 2 fast bowlers then the third spinner in the squad seems more sensible.

It depends on whether the selectors feel that England will have to play 2 spinners on occasion. Of course, not having a plausible second spinner will make it difficult to imagine that will be correct except on the burniest of Bunsens. Still, some extremely burny Bunsens might be anticipated. A lot also depends on the likely overall balance of the side, otherwise known as whether Flintoff is fit. If England is able to play 5 bowlers with Flintoff fit then fitting Rashid in to bowl and bat at 8 without having to drop down to just 2 fast bowlers then the third spinner in the squad seems more sensible.

They've always gone for two spinners in Sri Lankan tests. Given the figures of Batty last time, Im not sure if this is wise unless the number two is quality. Which is why I wouldnt take a number three.